MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature/N2/Dimentio

Dimentio

Remove Featured Article Status

1. GreenDisaster (talk) Simply put, the writing is abominable. It tries far, far, far too hard to be like a synopsis for a story and not an article for a wiki. This should definitely not be the case. Our articles are meant to inform people, and this article isn't able to inform with all of the unnecessarily fancy wording that jumbles the actual information. Let me just quote some of the absolute worst ones: "He learns that Bleck has an emotional side, and this could be used as a weakness to make it easier for the heroes to defeat him", "He needs a time and place, however, where this deception wouldn't be discovered", "The Pure Heart Mario acquired in this land is powerless against the destruction, but it could be repaired in the Underwhere", and plenty of others. I'm not saying that the article has to be "Dimentio did this and then did that, the end", but the way it is now, it's just too overly gaudy to be able to represent "the best of the best that the Super Mario Wiki has produced".
2. ThePremiumYoshi (talk) - Per the wall of text above.
3. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) This is why I put a rewrite template on Count Bleck's article, which is suffering the same fate as this article.
4. Electrical Bowser jr. (talk) Per GD.
5. YoshiFan1200 (talk) Per GreenDisaster.
6. King Pikante (talk) Per GreenDisaster.
7. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per all. This article could basically be alternatively titled "Super Paper Mario" considering the content.
8. Bowser Jr. 735 (talk) Per all.
9. TheRedOne (talk) Per all. I never read the article carefully - SYB is basically right. The original Super Paper Mario page could be deleted for this one. (Don't actually delete it, that would be stupid, I'm just saying that it's going off topic.)
10. LeftyGreenMario (talk) The article is slightly better, but again, it's slightly better. It's still too gaudy, and it needs to be written as an encyclopedia-like article, not a story.
11. The Zombie Bros. (talk) Per all.
12. Robecuba (talk) Per All
13. A Paragoomba and the Koopa Bros. Per all, also why do you pick these articles when they have terrible writing..?
14. Freakworld (talk) Per GreenDisaster. Also the article is too short IMO.

Keep Featured Article Status

1. Mario4Ever (talk) I feel as though the issues which led to the article's unfeaturing have been resolved and that any issues the article may have are not severe enough to justify unfeaturing the article.
   #TheRedOne (talk) The article is fine, I see nothing wrong with it. This 'fancy wording' is actually making this article a great one.
2. Tucayo (talk) - Per M4E.

Removal of Support/Oppose Votes

Mario4Ever

1. LeftyGreenMario (talk) You did a good job of removing the melodramatic parts. I still see some heavy-loaded words in the article, though, which is still unacceptable to keep it featured, so I think you need to push a little harder to remove the story-telling words in the article.
2. GreenDisaster (talk) I have to agree with LGM here. Your rewrite is a good start, but it's only a start. As LGM has mentioned, the general writing style is still rather mediocre.
3. Electrical Bowser jr. (talk) Per LGM and GD.

Comments

I went through and cut out a lot of unnecessary and redundant information. The offending section is still long, but it's a lot better than it was. Feedback would be appreciated. Mario4Ever (talk)

While it's certainly better, it's still quite... offending. There are still plenty of sentences that are unnecessarily elaborate, and the infobox has a quite awkward place on my screen, squished between two images. It's a great start, but there are still a few more miles until the end. Also, I thought we weren't allowed to use signatures on FA nomination articles? GreenDisaster (talk)

I fixed the infobox. For my screen, it's normal. YoshiFan1200 (talk)

The policy says that all Featured Article pages observe the No-Signature Policy (this probably counts as such a page, so to be safe, I modified the signature). Anyway, I'll probably go through again and make more changes tomorrow. I kind of figured this wouldn't be done in a single night. Mario4Ever (talk)

Ok, so I went back through and reworded sentences I thought were unnecessarily elaborate. If there are any I missed, please let me know. Mario4Ever (talk)

I still think the article needs a bit of trimming. I don't think the word "murder," "death", and "killing" should ever be used in a Mario-related article here. The general information needs some more scrutiny; I don't think Super Paper Mario is that dark. The article is better than before, but it still needs to remove those heavy loaded words. 173.55.155.46 16:54, 9 March 2013 (EST)